Class 380 - a bit of a munter?

[djw1981]

Anyone like the look of cl380 - the new 4car and 3car EMU from Siemens for the Ayrshire, Inverclyde and Glasgow Airport rail lines. The current rolling stock - cl 334 and 318 will be cascaded within the Scotrail franchise to cover the opening of the Airdrie-Bathgate line.

http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/node/3343

1. This will anger the RMT who wanted a company with a British factory to win the contract.
2. I don't think the gangway looks very good.... and how does a sloping front with sloping gangway doors work - can any Southern Region people tell us how Siemens make this happen?
3. This will boost the role of Shields Rd as the home depot for all FSR's EMU fleet, with stabling depots at Motherwell, Yoker and Airdrie. And could see a Siemens depot next to the current FSR one.

2.

 

[Dennis]

Looks like the front is falling to bits with all those crazy angles.

 

[thefab444]

I expect the sloping corridor is just for the artists impression and the real thing will be flat. I can't see how it will work otherwise unless it utilises a mechanism similar to the Junipers we have... which didn't work very well!

 

[djw1981]

Well yes, it took our cl334 Junipers about 3-4 years to start working properly..... and people wonder why TS chose Siemens...the 185 range seem to have worked out the box, as AIUI did the 350's. What about the DC Desiro's in SWT land?

 

[me123]

I'm certainly looking forward to the new trains. Hopefully they'll consider luggage space for Prestwick Airport and Glasgow Airport as well in the construction (I wouldn't put it past someone to forget them...)

I'd also hope they're laid out more like 170s than 334s. If they're successful, another batch could then be ordered for E-G electrification. Any word on FC accommodation?

Here's some thoughts though: It's blue. Perhaps it's a mock-up or a delivery livery, but the blue looks awfully like FSR colours as opposed to the "Carmine and Creme" SPT scheme... Also, will they extend platforms to allow 9-car trains (3x3-car)or is it just for 8, which would seem a little short-sighted.

 

[will1337]

Well that impression certainly isn't pretty, but it at least gives a vague nod towards looking aerodynamic. Obviously there is a need to couple units and have gangways between them, but why are so many units operating up to 100mph flat ended? Is there not enough saving in fuel/electricity justify the loss of a couple of seats in having a more aerodynamic front end?

 

[ADRboy]

A depot at Airdrie?

Looks terrible btw.

 

[LucaZone]

Looks like someone has just messed with the 3D image. I would say if you straighten out the train front it would exactly match the Desiro 350 units that are already OHE operated.

 

[P156KWJ]

I can already think of a nickname for them: snow ramps. Just look at the front!

 

[D306]

Have to agree with you there 156401. It looks like they were just drawing at 350 and then sneezed on the gangway

 

[P156KWJ]

or slipped when holding the pencil on the drawing board

(woohoo 1500th post)

 

[D306]

yeh thats what i meant

 

[JoshW1992]

Blimey, apart from the Southern class 455's, the 380 has to be the worst looking unit I have ever seen!

 

[laseandre]

What about pendodildos?

 

[JoshW1992]

They arent as bad as the '380.' I can just about live with Pendys.

 

[ADRboy]

As long as they are set out better than the 334's then i couldn't care right enough.

You can even get up some of the aisles they are so thin!

 

[D306]

I can just about live with Pendys.

I can't

 

[EE Type 3]

They arent as bad as the '380.' I can just about live with Pendys.

Even though it's just an artist's impression?

 

[JoshW1992]

Well, if that is just the artist's impression, then it is likely that a lot of modifications will occur. Maybe they wont be as ugly as that, all depends on what the final outcome is...

 

[me123]

Ugly's a bit extreme...

I've come up with a suggestion on the sloping gangways (but don't know if it's possible). Would it be possible for the top to sort of fold out thus having the sloping front with a gangway? I'm sure someone'll know what I mean

I'm surprised to see the gangways TBH. Since the launch of the 334s and the 318 refurb, I thought Scotland was doing away with gangways (at least on the leccys). OK, a 350 front has always looked much cleaner than an unrefurbed 318 front, but would that be enough to go for a gangwayed Desiro?

 

[laseandre]

Like, blended into the front, but it comes out when needed?

 

[djw1981]

The new depot is at Bathgate IIRC, sorry for my error.

The units will not have FC as constructed (though a future build for E&G could do) as the Ayrshire lines currently have no FC (in fact no ex SPT region services do - IIRC the reasoning is that customers would not (in the past) pay the premium. FC for the airport would be possible, but for a journey time of <15minutes, and a desire to cause modal shift for airport users, lower prices are probably the main driver here.

Carmine and cream is being replaced at reliverying/overhaul stage as SPT have nothing to do with running trains anymore. The livery will be whatever Transport Scotland stipulate the contract and they are currently happy for First to brand them. In teh future, a common Scottish Rail livery has been suggested where only the operator name would change (cf DLR, which is operated by Serco but the Serco name is much much less prominent). This is likely to occur at the next Franchise change (2014).
It is probably true (given the timescales) that a variant on the 350 is what we are getting. I was wondering why the leap all the way to 380 though and not 351 or 353 etc.. but I guess that is politics!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm surprised to see the gangways TBH. Since the launch of the 334s and the 318 refurb, I thought Scotland was doing away with gangways (at least on the leccys). OK, a 350 front has always looked much cleaner than an unrefurbed 318 front, but would that be enough to go for a gangwayed Desiro?

But AIUI.........MU's in multiple should have a member of safety trained staff in rear Unit. Not sure how this works with DOO and Ticket Examiners.......

It could be that the 350 has a safety case, and a non-gangwayed version would need new crash and structure testing done which would cost more, take more time and thus would fail to meet the delivery schedule of 2010/11. If 380 is like 350, then the teething problems have been experienced already and we should not experience the nightmare we had with 334 introduction in 2001-4.

 

[me123]

But, like the 222s, they'll be 80% new train or something like that

Good to get rid of SPT, though. Always seemed silly to have different fleets of 170s and 156s. (I know they're in the same operational pool in reality, but sitll silly to maintain two fleets). And FSR looks better

I do like the "one constant livery" idea as well. Saves money refreshing trains externally. Hopefully it'll be similar to the rather nice FSR livery.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If 380 is like 350, then the teething problems have been experienced already and we should not experience the nightmare we had with 334 introduction in 2001-4.

Wasn't exactly a nightmare. They're now very reliable units, and we got another 2 and a few turbos out of them

 

[djw1981]

Ummm I'm not sure about the extra Turbo's being part of that deal - that was due to Bombardier who made 170's messing up. Alstom (who made 334) only gave us the extra 334's. They are now quite reliable - though not top of the league of new EMU's in the Modern railways Golden Spanner awards last year IIRC. They had bad teething issues though and delayed the retirement of the cl 303 blu trains by a good couple of years.

Although delivered to Strathclyde in 2000, they did not enter passenger service until 2002 due to a large number of teething problems (in common with other Juniper-based classes) and technical failures which plagued the new units at their introduction.

From wikipedia.

 

[me123]

I thought we got a couple of 170s as well? Probably making that up or got it from wikipedia

 

[djw1981]

I think we did get some extra Turbo's but in a different contract with a different suplier, at a different time (though maybe the same general reason). See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/1459228.stm for 334

 

[theblackwatch]

:razz::razz::razz:

As long as they are set out better than the 334's then i couldn't care right enough.

You can even get up some of the aisles they are so thin!

That's an initiative by the NHS to try and get people to go on diets! :razz:

 

[Doorslammer]

Like, blended into the front, but it comes out when needed?

My thoughts exactly. Hinged at the bottom and hydraulically operated up to make it all vertical when necessary would be a good idea.

My nickname for this will be "cellar door", just because of that gangway. :P

 

[ADRboy]

:razz::razz::razz:

That's an initiative by the NHS to try and get people to go on diets! :razz:

There's one ticket examiner who cannot get through at all!

 

[me123]

The narrow aisles in the central 334 carriages are a bit of a joke TBH. Really awkward when you're travelling with luggage as I have done in the past. But the outer coaches are well laid out IMO. That central carriage is, IMO, the biggest flaw with these trains.